Please point out where I said that my opinion of them was an indisputable fact?
Maybe it was when you made the following statement:
it is most certainly fact-based. First, they are far right wing. Second, many of them, especially at the top, are nutjobs, conspiracy theorists, and/or have bought into foolish policy ideas.
Those are absolute statements, "are far right wing", "are nut jobs," are "conspiracy theorists" and have "bought into foolish policy ideas."
But you have nothing to back them up. The surveys on tea party members have found them to be better educated and higher income than most voters. While being more conservative than the average voter, they are well within the mainstream of American political thought and their biggest concerns are the deficit, the economy and the size and scope of the federal government.
As far as your "fact-based statement" that they have "bought into foolish policy ideas,” who made you the arbitrator of what is a foolish policy idea? Or did you just decree that?
The fact is that the concerns of the tea party members and their supporters have legitimate concerns that should be topics for an adult level discussion but I suspect that you know that you would lose such a discussion, so you do what you do which is to:
I agree that I do tend to label people.
As a pretty smart guy and as an exception to the rule. I never said every single person in the Tea Party fits my opinion of the group as a whole. I do believe most of them do though. What I admittedly can't know is what the ratio is.
I watched the football game today with my friend Jerome as I have for over the last 10 years. Jerome, who is black, is not a drug dealer. Rather he has a management position with a trucking company. Oh and he didn’t abandon his children. Instead he raised them as a single father. But of course his teenaged son doesn’t watch the games because he is busy hanging out with his gangbanger friends. Oh wait; he actually doesn’t watch the games because he goes to church instead. I guess Jerome is an exception to the rule.
See how wrong and offensive that sort of sterotype can be?
I always admired about him (William F. Buckley) was his ability to admit an error in reasoning and change his position accordingly. Additionally, I greatly admired his ability to fully and credibly explain his reasoning
The irony gallops.
Your response reinforces the premise of my original post, that your political posts consist of nothing but name calling and are therefore not worth responding to. This makes Boone’s request both moot and easy to adhere to.